Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Report: Hillary Server Tech Guy “Devastating Witness”

Report: Hillary Server Tech Guy “Devastating Witness”

Hillary’s over-the-top confidence masks possibly grim reality.

We know that Brayan Pagliano has cut an immunity deal with the feds.

The first of what I see as a multi-level roll-up of those around Hillary to prove, at minimum, a conspiracy to evade the FOIA laws, and at worst, serious national security criminal violations.

Katherine Herridge, who has been the top reporter on the story, reports, Source: Clinton IT specialist revealing server details to FBI, ‘devastating witness’:

Former Hillary Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano, a key witness in the email probe who struck an immunity deal with the Justice Department, has told the FBI a range of details about how her personal email system was set up, according to an intelligence source close to the case who called him a “devastating witness.”

The source said Pagliano told the FBI who had access to the former secretary of state’s system – as well as when – and what devices were used, amounting to a roadmap for investigators.

“Bryan Pagliano is a devastating witness and, as the webmaster, knows exactly who had access to [Clinton’s] computer and devices at specific times. His importance to this case cannot be over-emphasized,” the intelligence source said.

What it means in terms of the overall investigation is yet to be determined:

The source, who is not authorized to speak on the record due to the sensitivity of the ongoing investigation, said Pagliano has provided information allowing investigators to knit together the emails with other evidence, including images of Clinton on the road as secretary of state.

The cross-referencing of evidence could help investigators pinpoint potential gaps in the email record. “Don’t forget all those photos with her using various devices and it is easy to track the whereabouts of her phone,” the source said. “It is still boils down to a paper case. Did you email at this time from your home or elsewhere using this device? And here is a picture of you and your aides holding the devices.”

A source close to Pagliano did not dispute the basic details of what was provided to the FBI, but said the highly skilled former State Department IT specialist had met with the bureau on a “limited basis” and was at best a “peripheral” player in the investigation.

Hillary’s dismissiveness of the possibility of indictment seems a bit over the top, as if she’s wishing it to be true.

This clip may become a classic:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Katherine Herridge, FOX News, is GREAT.

And she’s the hotness…!!!

I have a new appreciation of and respect for Jorge.

Wonder if his daughter still has a job. If looks could kill, she’d at least be without a father.

American Human | March 11, 2016 at 3:38 pm

Mr. Pagliano needs to start packing heat, you know, concealed carry etc.
Remember the list of “People the Clintons Know Who Have Been Killed”, not natural causes, killed.
Back in the 90s the list was up to about 60 or so. How many people to you know who have been “killed” and not in combat or something.

    forksdad in reply to American Human. | March 11, 2016 at 3:49 pm

    If they want you dead you’re dead. Better to be quiet and far, far away. As soon as his handlers are done with him his clock is ticking. Maybe he can join Snowden in Russia.

    Lady Penguin in reply to American Human. | March 11, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    You’re right, and furthermore, he needs to go into witness protection. Maybe they already have him protected that way. But no one is to be trusted when it comes to the Clintons.

      legacyrepublican in reply to Lady Penguin. | March 11, 2016 at 7:23 pm

      Of course, you could disguise him as a founding father so they will just ignore the fact he ever existed.

        Lady Penguin in reply to legacyrepublican. | March 11, 2016 at 7:50 pm

        Ok, Legacypub, help me out here. How do you have a picture in your avatar? My hubby and I have checked every possible way to place my picture, penguin of course, and we cannot find the way to do it on the profile page.

          legacyrepublican in reply to Lady Penguin. | March 11, 2016 at 9:24 pm

          I set up an avatar on gravatar.com with the same username as LI. It somehow automatically updated my LI pic.

          That is normal, Lady P.

          This is a WordPress blog and WordPress interfaces seamlessly with Gravatar for user icons. Only problem I have encountered is what happens in the short term after changing your Gravatar-based avatar to a different one.

    snopercod in reply to American Human. | March 11, 2016 at 4:37 pm

    Here ya’ go: REMEMBERING THE DEAD W-a-a-a-ay more than 60.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to American Human. | March 11, 2016 at 7:53 pm

    He needs to hire a food-taster, if he can find anyone that would apply for the job.

While I hope I am wrong, I have concluded that the obama administration and the ruling elite are slow-walking this “investigation,” and that nothing will come of it directly.
Nothing coming of it directly, however, could contribute to a great reckoning happening in our country down the road.

    4fun in reply to Rick. | March 11, 2016 at 4:30 pm

    Reading the article made me wonder if the investigation is being shunted aside for hitlery and the source is trying to force it forward.
    I’ve read obama isn’t happy with the FBI director.

Has to happen quickly or not at all. The dems will not risk their front runner later in the year. If she gets elected it’s done as well. She’s not a republican and there’s enough votes in the Senate to stop an impeachment.

If she doesn’t get elected she is still part of the establishment. The establishment protects its own.

Expect an underling to fall on his sword (no way it’s Mrs. Wiener). Maybe three or four. But the Clinton clan will have to pay for those. They don’t exactly inspire loyalty.

That guy is my #1 draft pick for the 2016 dead pool.

Perhaps Obama will declare that it’s time for Comey to retire. The FBI’s current agitation over Apple and iPhone locks might be a convenient excuse. I’d expect the FBI to then find discretion re Hillary the better part of valor.

    Arminius in reply to tom swift. | March 13, 2016 at 10:16 pm

    Obama can impotently declare whatever he wants, but Comey will give him the finger because the FBI director doesn’t serve at the pleasure of the President. The FBI director serves a fixed ten year term precisely to insulate him from political pressure from petty dictators like Obama and Comey’s term won’t be over until after Obama leaves office.

    Obama might as well declare it’s time for Justice Alito to retire, because Obama can’t do a damn thing to make either man retire.

    Unless Comey wants to leave, i.e. resign in protest over Obama sweeping Hillary’s crimes under the rug and refusing to indict her, he stays in his position and Obama can’t force him out under any pretext.

      Sammy Finkelman in reply to Arminius. | March 14, 2016 at 1:47 pm

      Obama can impotently declare whatever he wants, but Comey will give him the finger because the FBI director doesn’t serve at the pleasure of the President.

      tell that to FBI Director William Sessions, fired by President Bill Clinton on July 19, 1993, on trumped up ethics charges brought by his underlings (whom Bill Clinton was in cahoots with.)

HERSELF!’s personal diety, Saul Alynski said “Pick the Target, Freeze It, Personalize It and Polarize It.” The single most polarizing politician in America, Hillary Rodham Clinton, stands “Head and Shoulders” as a target, she does not enjoy anywhere near Bubba’s gift of obfuscation, the email server in her home personalizes her enduring legacy of being ‘above the law’. The Fibbies got the right person to sing.

One hopes his immunity includes Witness Protection.

Lady Penguin | March 11, 2016 at 4:31 pm

Professor, hope you don’t mind, but Ms. Herridge’s spells her first name with a “C” – Catherine. 🙂

I hope and pray everyday that Hillary will be indicted. It’s much more than someone getting away with one criminal act – if the truth doesn’t come out, then the entire rule of law and justice system is broken in this country.

She could blame everything on underlings UNTIL it came out that she was personally SENDING classified email from her server.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to MattMusson. | March 14, 2016 at 1:42 pm

    But most of her additiona to e-mail was brief messages. Which could obviously also occur over the telephone.

    And I also think that when she thought she was doing something that was illegal, or that she should not do for ethical reasons, she did it over the telephone.

Can an AG prosecute a POTUS? Can a POTUS pardon herself?

Cruz pledged to prosecute her if Lynch shanks it.

I love that guy…!!!

Any underling worth a darn in the administration should be keeping a diary of their day to day activity with time/date stamps. Said diary should be archived quarterly to hard media such as CD/DVD and stored in two different offsite locations, neither of which should be disclosed to anybody else in or out of the administration until after they have left government service and written their book.

Hilliavelli’s imperial arrogance outstrips even Obozo’s. I mean, what person in his or her right mind conceives the notion of transacting official government business of the highest sensitivity on a homebrew server? The venal, lawless, self-serving, selfish arrogance displayed by this conceit is beyond belief. The crone has thoroughly disqualified herself for any political office by this reckless and illegal stunt, even before pondering her disastrous foreign policy failures and her faux charitable foundation. And, she still offers the pathetic excuse that the messages weren’t marked classified when they weren sent? She thinks the American people are that stupid? Actually, given her levels of support amongst the populace, she may well be right.

Literally hundreds are equally as guilty as Hillary in this.
I cannot help but wonder, are they going to indict them all, or sweep it under the rug.
But Obama, Kerry, the entire State Department… the e-mail chains may be even greater than hundreds.
Reading the rules at face value would make you guilty if you were even a reciepent, and failed to immediatly notify authorities.

By “rules” you mean federal criminal statutes concerning the protection of National Defense Information. So, what’s your point? People who violate the Espionage Act by failing to report the spillage of NDI shouldn’t be prosecuted for their felonies?

I have zero sympathy for anyone involved. If you don’t want the responsibilities that go with acquiring and maintaining a security clearance, don’t apply for a gub’mint job that requires a security clearance. This isn’t a hard question.

But, no, they’re not equally guilty as Clinton as only Clinton set up her own private server. Clearly with the intention of evading the requirements of the Federal Records Act and the Freedom Of Information Act. And by doing so demonstrating complete and utter contempt for national security. Because a Secretary of State routinely deals with classified/NDI. And if someone like Hillary Clinton refuses to use the proper government systems but instead uses her own private server that is the very definition of gross negligence. Which is the standard to convict her per 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.

There are few gray areas here. One could argue that the line between the DoS’s classification level of Sensistive But Unlclassified and Confidential is blurry, because it it is. So someone who didn’t report receiving a Confidential email from Clinton could be forgiven for not recognizing it as classified as opposed to Sensitive But Unclassified.

But when you start talking about Secret and especially TS/SCI there’s no gray area or blurry lines at that point. Unless you’re a complete idiot you know at that level it is at least classified information. And complete idiots should not have clearances.

Two comments…
>
First, having had a security clearance, I am absolutely sickened by the ies Hillary spews and even more so by the blind obedience of the media and other sycophants who refuse to perform even the most simple checks on what she claims. Hillary claims that when she creates a document such as an e-mail that it is up to the State Dept. to determine if it is classified. Wrong answer. Hillary is required to undergo hours of training on what is and is not classified. She is required to receive refresher training at least annually on this. It is clearly her responsibility to determine the classification of her documents and if these is any question, then she has State Dept resources at her immediate beck and call who will clarify and make the call for her. The determination on whether something is classified is her and only her responsibility.
>
Second, we can expect this all to play out slowly such that the decision to indict or not will not occur until well after Hillary has attained enough delegates to win the nomination. At this point it will become clear that Hilary cannot win and will be indicted so she will have no choice to drop out which leaves the DNC in a bind. Biden will be tapped to come rescue them. Biden’s late entry will minimize the people’s ability to know him , what he has done, and how capable he really is. This will be political manipulation on a grand scale as the DNC looks to steal the presidency from the Republicans

    Arminius in reply to Cleetus. | March 13, 2016 at 12:57 pm

    Cleetus, Hillary Clinton was supposed to get even more training than the average person with a clearance. She was designated by job title as an original classification authority per executive order, the latest iteration of which is E.O. 13526- Original Classification Authority issued by Obama on 29 December 2009.

    As an OCA she was supposed to get the training required to not only recognize classified information when she sees it but to know precisely what level it needs to be classified at and what caveats the information requires. So she is the resource to make the call. And she would have a case that the information was unclassified because she considered it unclassified. She is the ultimate authority at the State Department as to what is and isn’t classified, but, and this is an important but, only if the State Department is the originator of the information.

    That’s Colin Powell’s defense. The State Department is clearly trying to help Clinton out with her “everyone else did it, too” defense. So at the same time the people at State are making excuses such as not having enough people or time for not being able to meet a federal judge’s order to produce a certain amount of emails by a certain deadline, they are diverting exactly those people and wasting time on an entirely unnecessary and clearly improper (given their legally binding responsibilities) to search Colin Powell’s and Condoleeza Rice’s emails to see if they can tar them with the same brush.

    Rice didn’t use email, so they can’t. State says Powell had two classified emails in his unclas system. Powell says he considered it unclas at the time. And if the State Dept. originated the information during his tenure Powell is exactly right. So would Clinton be, if we were talking about State Department originated information. But we aren’t so Clinton’s problem is entirely different. She’s got a bonafide, and huge, legal problem on her hands.

    We know from the State and Intel community IG’s letter to Congress that a considerable number of the emails contained information originated by the intel community. Step one in the classification process is to see if another original classification authority has already classified it. If so, do not pass go, do not collect $200, and do not go to step 2. You’re done. Somebody else owns the information and whatever they say goes. Clinton would have no grounds and no authority to dispute the classification level and caveats.

    According to the press much of the classified information was Foreign Government Information. I tend to believe the press reports because, duh! Exchanging information with foreign governments is what the State Department does. Here’s the thing; the foreign government providing the FGI is the originator and owns that information. If that government says it’s classified, again Hillary Clinton has no grounds and no authority dispute their determination. Again by a different E.O. 13526- Classified National Security Information (I have no idea why Obama would use the same number for two different E.O.s but then I can’t explain a lot of what this numbskull does) FGI either retains it’s “original classification markings or shall be assigned a U.S. classification that provides a degree of protection at least equivalent to that required by the entity that furnished the information.”

    FGI that isn’t provided in document form by a foreign government, but rather is relayed to State via a conversation with a State Dept. official or special envoy, is always classified at least Confidential. Always. Foreign governments will not share their views, plans, intentions, etc., with us unless they believe we’ll keep those to ourselves.

    Frankly I think this is one aspect of Hillary’s private email server scandal that doesn’t get enough attention. Given Clinton’s dismissive attitude toward it, that it’s a phony scandal cooked up by the VRWC, given Obama’s comments publicly and prematurely declaring her innocent of any wrongdoing (and no doubt attempting to exert undue influence over the investigation) and given the open discussion that Clinton won’t be indicted because she is just too important and special to have to have to obey the law, if I were the head of a foreign government I’d make a public stink about all this right now. That Hillary Clinton and this administration clearly don’t take their information/intelligence sharing agreements seriously and therefore my government will no longer share information with the USG.

    I know we’ve done exactly the same with military-to-military information sharing. When we share classified information with a foreign military we do it per an official procedure that spells out how the information is to be safeguarded. If they compromise the information because their security procedures are lax we cut them off until they fix things. And that included prosecuting people (in their courts, not ours) if they committed any criminal violations in the process of compromising that information.

    Anyway, the bottom line is that the fact Clinton was designated on original classification authority makes her lies even more nauseating. I tell you this; if this situation does see the inside of a courtroom none of those excuses will fly. If she tries to claim it somehow makes a difference the information wasn’t classified or that the originator such as CIA or NGIA overclassified it the judge will explain to the jury why those excuses are lies and must be ignored.

      Sammy Finkelman in reply to Arminius. | March 14, 2016 at 1:30 pm

      I have no idea why Obama would use the same number for two different E.O.s but then I can’t explain a lot of what this numbskull does)

      The second one is a revised version of the first, and supercedes it?

      if I were the head of a foreign government I’d make a public stink about all this right now

      None have. They might have made a private complaint about it.

      They would be looking for assurances that nothing get out, which is what the FBI is trying to determine. One thing Bryan Pagliano is reportedly claiming is that they did not successfully get hacked, and that he can prove it. (That still might not absolve anyone of a charge of mishandling classified information. Nothing got out from what David Petraeus did)

      But I have one question: All this would have been done casually. It is quite possible to just as casually mention classified information, or something dervived form it, ove the telephone – and telephone messages, unlike e-mail, are not recorded.

      Does this concern about classified information divulged via e-mail mean anything actually??

Sammy Finkelman | March 14, 2016 at 1:20 pm

The first of what I see as a multi-level roll-up of those around Hillary to prove, at minimum, a conspiracy to evade the FOIA laws..

There is no such crime, I think, as conspiracy to evade the FOIA laws, although that may have ben a motive for breaking other laws.

Bryan Pagliano required immunity because he was getting paid privately by the Clintons at the same time when he was working for the State Department, and did not disclose his otehr income, which was a violation of law.

Now he might testify that Hillary Clinton knew all about this hiding of the fact she only used her own private e-mail. That probably wouldn’t get her indicted, though.

One thing she probably did was ensure that the State Department did not have an Inspector General during all the time she was there – which was the longest any agency has gone without an Inspector General since they had Inspector Generals, since about 1979.

And it’s very likely the purpose of the private e-mail server was to make it easier to hide criminal activity she intended to commit – there would be no danger of a slip-up if a government account for her did not exist in the first place.

Sammy Finkelman | March 14, 2016 at 1:36 pm

I think Hillary Clinton probably deliberfately disclosed classified or confidential information to Sidney Blumenthal over the telephone

This is what she did:

Sidney Blumenthal would periodically send to her disinformation – from whom is anyone’s gues s- but he claimed it claimed from ex-CIA European Bureau chief Tyler Drumheller – whjich Hillary Clinton would then send to her top aide Jake Sullivan after remioved the originating information. She would ask him to circulate this all over the U.S. government – sometimes apologizing for the report and saying she didn’t think it was likely to be true – telling others only that someone close to Hillary Clinton had told her that – and ask for reports to be written telling what various ambassadors and others thought of it.

I think Hillary Clinton then reported back how receptive people in the U.S. government were to this disinfromation.

But there’s no proof. Except that she periodically make arrangements (via email) to talk to Sidney Blumenthal.

She also has claimed these reportrs were unsolicited.

Sammy Finkelman | March 14, 2016 at 1:43 pm

Hillary’s dismissiveness of the possibility of indictment seems a bit over the top, as if she’s wishing it to be true.

No!

She wants everybody else else to think the idea is not worth taking seriously.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend